• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

National Guard Involvement

Va_Nemo

Member
Joined
May 1, 2016
Messages
653
Location
Lynchburg
Response reported.

Nemo



VA National Guard Issues Statement Over Calls To Enforce Gun Control
Posted at 3:30 pm on December 13, 2019 by Cam Edwards

Democrat Congressman Donald McEachin’s comments about using the National Guard to enforce Governor Ralph Northam’s proposed gun control laws in Virginia has caused a storm of controversy in the state, to the point that the Adjutant General of the Virginia National Guard has issued a statement, after scores of phone calls and emails from concerned citizens and curious media figures. WSLS-TV in Roanoke was the first to report on the comments by Major General Timothy P. Williams.
“We have received multiple questions regarding proposed legislation for the 2020 General Assembly session and the authority of the Governor of Virginia to employ the Virginia National Guard in a law enforcement role. Please make sure you share this message with your all of your personnel.

continued at link above.
 

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
5,839
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
How are they going to do that?
CONSTITUTION OF VIRGINIA
ARTICLE I
Bill of Rights
Section 13. Militia; standing armies; military subordinate to civil power. That a well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state, therefore, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.
Code of Virginia
§ 44-1. Composition of militia.
The militia of the Commonwealth of Virginia shall consist of all able-bodied residents of the Commonwealth who are citizens of the United States and all other able-bodied persons resident in the Commonwealth who have declared their intention to become citizens of the United States, who are at least 16 years of age and, except as hereinafter provided, not more than 55 years of age. The militia shall be divided into three classes: the National Guard, which includes the Army National Guard and the Air National Guard; the Virginia Defense Force; and the unorganized militia.
So, short of declaring war, Congressman Donald McEachin (who by the way is an attorney) wants one division of the militia to attack another division of the militia.

Who elected this idiot?
 
Last edited:

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
5,839
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
A bunch of other idiots?

Nemo
Damn, Where can I get one of those crystal balls?

The bad part is this guy is an attorney. He not only took an oath as an attorney, he also took an oath to sit in congress. How about you emailing this guy and quote the above law and ask him how he intends to carry out his brilliant idea.
 

Va_Nemo

Member
Joined
May 1, 2016
Messages
653
Location
Lynchburg
Maybe the surgeon doing his LAWbotomy used a dull scalpel. Or took a bit too thick of a slice.

How did yours do? I am recovered from mine. Retirement really helps.

Nemo
 

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
5,839
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Learned that myself long ago. Methinks we are in good shape on that stuff.

Nemo
Good to hear. But you need to shove that down their throats. And make the following clear to your elected officials.

The Supreme Court in Marbury v. Madison, 5 US 137, 177. (1803) stated: “Certainly all those who have framed written constitutions contemplate them as forming the fundamental and paramount law of the nation, and, consequently, the theory of every such government must be, that an act of the legislature, repugnant to the constitution, is void.” And, in their closing the Marbury court, at page 179, stated: “Thus, the particular phraseology of the constitution of the United States confirms and strengthens the principle, supposed to be essential to all written constitutions, that a law repugnant to the constitution is void; and that courts, as well as other departments, are bound by that instrument.”

The Supreme Court in United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542, 553, 23 L.Ed 588 (1876) declared that the right of “bearing arms for a lawful purpose.” was not granted by the Constitution. The understanding was that it was in existence before the Constitution. “The second amendment declares that it shall not be infringed, but this, as has been seen, means no more than that it shall not be infringed by Congress.”

Then 134 years later the Supreme Court declared that the Second Amendment applies to the states. See McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. 742 (2010).

In 2008 the United States Supreme Court in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570, 592, 171 L.Ed 2d 637, 128 S.Ct. 2783 (2008) declared “we find that they guarantee the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation. This meaning is strongly confirmed by the historical background of the Second Amendment.” The Court then cited Cruikshank as part of its historical analysis. Thus, Heller held that the right to bear arms for a lawful purpose was secured by the U.S. Constitution.

More importantly, Heller did not limit the right to bear arms. It specifically stated, “Second Amendment implicitly recognizes the pre-existence of the right and declares only that it ‘shall not be infringed.” The Court reiterated, “Our opinion is, that any law, State or Federal, is repugnant to the Constitution, and void, which contravenes this right, originally belonging to our forefathers.”

Additionally, the Supreme Court in Caetano v. Massachusetts, 577 U. S. ____ (2016) unanimously held that “the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding,” and that this “Second Amendment right is fully applicable to the States.”

Just saying.....
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,453
Location
White Oak Plantation
...all we gotta do is to get those 2A supporting judges to strap up and get any politician...or cop...to comply with their edicts, or else...I will not be holding my breath...
 

Ghost1958

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2015
Messages
1,266
Location
Kentucky
Ordering a military force to go potentially kill or allow to be killed their own family and friends to uphold an unconstitutional law doesn't seem like that bright a plan IMO.
 
Top